Import Opening Balances (Algbilanss)

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations (readOnlyHint false, idempotentHint true) are consistent. Description adds: dry_run previews parsed balances and debit=credit check without saving, and re-import replaces stored set. This provides behavioral context beyond annotations, but could mention state changes more explicitly.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, focused paragraph. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds detail. Although efficient, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate instructions) but remains clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage instructions, parameter behavior, and idempotency. It is complete and self-contained.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds significant meaning: explains pasted_text as 'copied register text' and integrates dry_run into the workflow ('previews...without saving; set dry_run=false to persist'). This adds value beyond the schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly specifies the action ('Capture the e-arveldaja 'Algbilansi kanded''), the resource (opening-balance register), and why it's needed ('which the RIK API omits'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings by highlighting its unique role.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit instructions for usage: paste the register text, and explains the dry_run parameter's behavior (default true to preview, false to persist). It also notes re-import replaces stored data. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare to alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.